David Baker

* After only three days on the job, the sudden departure of David Baker as Ventura County’s Chief Administrative Officer was disappointing to all who serve in or rely on county government.

His comments regarding serious financial and operational problems facing our county were also deeply troublesome. It is truly unfortunate that Mr. Baker arrived at his dire conclusions after consulting only a few sources with an obviously biased perspective.

It is true that our Board of Supervisors is currently facing some financial challenges that will require strong leadership and difficult decisions. The short term problems are rooted in the loss of millions in anticipated revenue and penalties resulting from the well-documented mental health merger.

As sheriff, I was looking forward to working with Mr. Baker on addressing his valid concerns and correcting some of his other observations, which were not grounded in fact.

As an example, if he had asked I would have told him that the citizens in Ventura County clearly voted to extend the half-cent sales tax only because they were told their money would go to protect and augment public safety, not county infrastructure or social services. I would have commended the Board’s courage in adopting an ordinance to assure the voters that their priorities would be honored. I would have also shared my conviction that if this money were not needed for public safety, the only honest option would be to return it to the taxpayers rather than redirecting it to suit the whims of the bureaucracy.

I would have pointed out to Mr. Baker that the 4% of the county budget generated by this initiative has been one of the greatest benefits to not just our residents, but to other county departments, as well. The Sheriff’s Department was able to staff the Todd Road Jail, open storefront offices, create a crime suppression unit and staff patrol cars with two deputies at night without one dime from the General Fund. Despite what others may have told him, I would have informed him that our department alone has returned over $30 million in year-end surpluses since 1993, because of effective fiscal controls. That money has gone directly to fund non-public-safety agencies.

This revenue source also kept us from competing with other agencies for new revenue. A simple review of the figures would reveal that county government has prospered under the Board of Supervisors’ administration of this fund. The real threat to the county is not public safety funding, but a shift of property tax dollars from local government to the state.

Finally, I would have reminded Mr. Baker that Ventura County has faced many such challenges in the past. Like any family, we occasionally disagree as to which course to follow. Nonetheless, this county has been able to overcome difficulties through the hard work of its employees, the wisdom of its elected and appointed leaders, and a commitment to remember that we are here to serve the public’s interest, not our own.

BOB BROOKS

Ventura County Sheriff

* For 11 years, I served as assistant CAO of the city of Los Angeles. In Los Angeles the CAO has only authority to report and make recommendations on all major expenditures and policy actions. In that sense he is not a manager, but those who do manage the city, the City Council and mayor, hardly make a move without asking for the CAO’s advice. Much depends upon his integrity and that of his office.

From what I read, the CAO of Ventura County is little more than a figurehead. To be effective the CAO needs the legal authority to be involved in all important county matters and to have the confidence of the controlling authority, the Board of Supervisors.

ARTHUR O, SPAULDING

Ojai